($16t) KT call inspired by the great gigabet

[wiggs73]

mike,

also, re: "And we cannot possibly believe that KT is ahead in this spot often enough to make this a +cEV call."

There's no way this isn't +cEV. It isn't about how often you are ahead in a hot and cold sense, what matters is how much equity you have vs. their ranges. you should download pokerstove and run some calcs with this hand. but you don't need a TON of equity getting 3:1.

[Mike MacIntosh]

Thanks wiggs...I appreciate your help...

[Snarf]

I thot the crux of the block theory wasn't that we were trying to add to our stack, but that we were actually seeking to GIVE our chips away, of sorts.

In essence, to take a 'block' of our stack that is meaningless to us and GIVE it away to someone else. (-EV)

but that the new arrangement of stack sizes after that gifted 'block' is soo +EV for whatever pwning reasons (looking ahead to the bubble possibly) that it outweighs the -EV of the first move.

Basically, Giga did more than try to arrange his own stack in a fashion as to be healthy on the bubble. He tried to arrange other people's stacks around him in a fashion as most beneficial to him, as well.

Pretty sure he does this in MTTs as well.


Could be wrong tho.


Once again, this is a mis-application of block theory. Don't think any 'is this it?' threads have ever actually found it.


Snarf

[wiggs73]

snarf,

sorry but this really isn't it at all. giga gives the cliff notes version in his own post:

"Basically, I had made a -ev call because I had felt that the positive ev I would gain later in the game, if I win the hand, outweighs the negative ev of the specific hand."

edit: the stack arrangement, i haven't been able to grasp as fully, but i'm pretty sure it has little (if anything) to do with his block theory.

[Shillx]

Block theory is a good one though it doesn't really apply here. You are laying odds with KT but you have to call due to the pot size. Anyone know how low you can go here? I'm thinking somewhere in the 50% range but I'm not sure.

[rdgabino]

[ QUOTE ]
uh...

seems really standard to me.

3:1 vs. 2 really short stacks and you have broadways + close the action.

[/ QUOTE ]

[HesseJam]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I thought I had a "good" understanding of block theory. Could someone give a breif summary of the concept?

[/ QUOTE ]



[/ QUOTE ]

LOL! From now on this image will come up in my head whenver I will read about the block theory.